Assessment #3: Mock edTPA Project Description and Rubric
The project addresses the following ACTFL/CAEP standards (2013):
Candidates will:
STANDARD 1: Language Proficiency: Interpersonal, Interpretive, and Presentational.
1a) Speak in the interpersonal mode of communication at a minimum level of "Advanced Low"
or "Intermediate High" (for Arabic, Chinese, Japanese and Korean) on the ACTFL Oral
Proficiency Interview (OPI) according to the target language being taught.
1b) Interpret oral, printed, and video texts by demonstrating both literal and figurative or
symbolic comprehension.
1c) Present oral and written information to audiences of listeners or readers, using language at a
minimum level of "Advanced Low" or "Intermediate High" according to the target language
being taught.
STANDARD 2: Cultures, Linguistics, Literatures, and Concepts from Other Disciplines
2a) Demonstrate target cultural understandings and compare cultures through perspectives,
products, and practices of those cultures.
2c) Demonstrate understanding of texts on literary and cultural themes as well as
interdisciplinary
topics.
STANDARD 3: Language Acquisition Theories and Knowledge of Students and Their
Needs
3a) Demonstrate an understanding of key principles of language acquisition and create
linguistically and culturally rich learning environments.
3b) Demonstrate an understanding of child and adolescent development to create a supportive
learning environment for each student.
STANDARD 4: Integration of Standards in Planning and Instruction.
4a) Demonstrate an understanding of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st
Century and their state standards and use them as the basis for instructional planning.
4b) Integrate the goal areas of the Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century
and their state standards in their classroom practice.
4c) Use the Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century and their state
standards to select and integrate authentic texts, use technology.
STANDARD 5: Assessment of Languages and Cultures – Impact on Student Learning.
5a) Design and use ongoing authentic performance assessments using a variety of assessment
models for all learners, including diverse students.
5b) Reflect on and analyze the results of student assessments, adjust instruction accordingly, and
use data to inform and strengthen subsequent instruction.
Project Description
Throughout this course, candidates will be given chances to teach Mandarin to a class of high
school students. Based on their teaching experience, this final project asks candidates to
complete a mock edTPA, a new component of the NYS teacher certification examinations
(standard 4a). Since an edTPA typically has three tasks – Planning, Instruction, and Assessment,
to complete the project, candidates will follow the steps below in the order of the three tasks:
1. Pre-task:
o Candidates familiarize themselves with the groups of students they are going to teach
and complete the Context for Learning Information (standard 3b);
2. Planning task:
o Candidates identify one lesson they are going to teach;
o Candidates write a lesson plan for this lesson, using a template that reflects backward
design (standard 4a, 2a, 2c);
o Candidates select key instructional materials (including authentic materials) needed to
understand what they and the students will be doing (standard 4c, 2a, 2c);
o Candidates prepare copies or directions for all planned performance assessments from
the lesson (standard 5a, 2a, 2c, 4c);
o Candidates complete the Planning Commentary (standard 5b, 3a-b);
3. Instruction task:
o Candidates video record their teaching and select one or two video clips (no more
than 15 minutes in total);
o Candidates analyze the video clip(s) and complete the Instruction Commentary
(standard 1a-c, 2a, 2c, 3a-b, 4b, 5b);
4. Assessment task:
o Candidates select one assessment from the lesson that they will use to evaluate their
students’ developing knowledge and skills;
o Candidates define the evaluation criteria (e.g. rubric) they will use to analyze student
learning (standard 5a);
o Candidates collect and analyze student work from this selected assessment to identify
quantitative and qualitative patterns of learning within, and across learners, in the
class (standard 5b);
o Candidates select three student work samples to illustrate their analysis of the patterns
(these three students will be their focus students) (standard 5b);
o Candidates summarize the learning of the whole class, and refer to work samples
from the three focus students to illustrate patterns in student communicative
proficiency in the target language across the class (standard 5b);
o Candidates submit feedback on the assessment for the three focus students in written,
audio, or video form (standard 5b, 1a-c);
o Candidates analyze their assessment of student communicative proficiency, and plan
for next steps by completing the Assessment Commentary (standard 5b, 3a-b).
Candidates will submit the portfolio to the course instructor and present their projects in front of
the class (standard 1a-c). The portfolio includes the following items:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Context for Learning Information
Lesson plan
Key instructional materials
Planned assessments
Planning Commentary
Video clips of teaching
Instruction Commentary
Assessment evaluation criteria
Student work samples
Feedback on student work
Assessment Commentary
Final Project Rubrics:
The rubrics1 for the final project are adapted (abridged) from edTPA World Language Assessment Handbook (2013).
1. Planning Rubrics
o Rubric 1: Planning for Communicative Proficiency in the Target Language
How do the candidate’s plans build students’ communicative proficiency in the target language in meaningful cultural context(s)?
Level 1
Candidate’s plans focus
solely on vocabulary and
grammar with no
connections to language
functions of the target
language.
Level 2
Plans for instruction
support vague connections
between language forms
and functions in the target
language, primarily
focusing on the
interpretive mode of
communication.
Level 3
Plans for instruction build
on each other to provide
connections between
language forms and
functions of the target
language in a
meaningful cultural
context, focusing on more
than one mode of
communication.
Level 4
Plans for instruction build
on each other to provide
clear connections between
language forms and
functions of the target
language in meaningful
cultural context(s),
focusing on all three modes
of communication.
Level 5
Level 4 plus:
Candidate explains how s/he
will use language tasks and
materials to lead students
to make clear and consistent
connections between
functions and forms of the
target language in
meaningful cultural
context(s).
There are significant
content inaccuracies that
will lead to student
misunderstandings. OR
Standards, objectives,
language tasks, and
materials are not aligned
with each other.
1
In the following tables, text representing key differences between adjacent score levels is shown in bold. Evidence that does not meet Level 1 criteria is scored at Level 1.
o Rubric 4: Planning Assessments to Monitor and Support Students’ Development of Communicative Proficiency in the Target Language
How are the informal and formal assessments selected or designed to monitor students’ development of communicative proficiency in the target
language in meaningful cultural context(s)?
Level 1
The assessments provide no
evidence of students'
development of
communicative proficiency
in the target language.
Level 2
The assessments provide
limited evidence to
monitor students’
development of
communicative proficiency
in the target language at
different points during the
learning segment.
Level 3
The assessments provide
limited evidence to
monitor students’
development of
communicative proficiency
in the target language in a
meaningful cultural context
at different points during
the learning segment.
Level 4
The assessments provide
multiple forms of evidence
to monitor students’
development of
communicative proficiency
in the target language in
meaningful cultural
context(s) throughout the
learning segment.
Level 5
Level 4 plus:
The assessments are
strategically designed to
allow individuals or
groups with specific needs
to demonstrate their
communicative
proficiency in the target
language.
Assessments are NOT
aligned with the central
focus and
standards/objectives for the
learning segment
2. Instruction Rubrics
o Rubric 5: Learning Environment
How does the candidate demonstrate a positive learning environment that supports students’ engagement in learning?
Level 1
The clips reveal evidence of
disrespectful interactions
between teacher and
students or between
students. OR Candidate
allows disruptive behavior
to interfere with student
learning.
Level 2
The candidate
demonstrates respect for
students. Candidate
provides a learning
environment that serves
primarily to control
student behavior, and
minimally supports the
learning goals.
Level 3
The candidate demonstrates
rapport with and respect for
students. Candidate
provides a positive, lowrisk social environment
that reveals mutual
respect among students.
Level 4
The candidate demonstrates
rapport with and respect for
students. Candidate
provides a challenging
learning environment that
promotes mutual respect
among students.
Level 5
The candidate demonstrates
rapport with and respect for
students. Candidate
provides a challenging
learning environment that
provides opportunities to
express varied
perspectives and promotes
mutual respect among
students.
o Rubric 6: Engaging Students’ Target Language Communication
How does the candidate actively engage students in developing communicative proficiency in the target language?
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
In the clips, students are
observed in tasks that
focus solely on vocabulary
and grammar with no
connections to language
functions of the target
language.
In the clips, students are
participating in language
tasks that provide vague
connections between
language forms and
functions in the target
language, primarily
focusing on the
interpretive mode of
communication.
In the clips, students are
engaged in cooperative
language tasks that
provide connections
between language forms and
functions of the target
language in a meaningful
cultural context, focusing
on either the interpersonal
or presentational mode of
communication.
In the clips, students are
engaged in cooperative
language tasks that provide
clear connections between
language forms and
functions of the target
language in meaningful
cultural context(s), focusing
on either the interpersonal
or presentational mode of
communication.
Level 5
Level 4 plus:
Students are engaged in
cooperative language tasks
that lead students to
deepen and extend
communicative
proficiency in the target
language in meaningful
cultural context(s).
o Rubric 7: Deepening Student Communicative Proficiency in the Target Language
How does the candidate elicit student responses to promote their communicative proficiency in the target language in meaningful cultural
context(s)?
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
The candidate does most
of the talking and students
provide few responses.
OR Candidate responses
include significant content
inaccuracies that will lead
to student
misunderstandings.
Candidate primarily asks
surface-level questions
about correct usage of
grammar and vocabulary
and evaluates student
responses as correct or
incorrect.
Candidate elicits student
responses related to use of
the target language that
requires going beyond the
correct usage of grammar
and vocabulary.
Candidate elicits and builds
on students’ responses to
develop communicative
proficiency, making
connections between
language functions and
forms in meaningful
cultural context(s).
Candidate facilitates
interactions among
students so they can
evaluate their own abilities
to develop communicative
proficiency
o Rubric 8: Subject-Specific Pedagogy
How does the candidate promote comparisons and connections between students’ prior experiences and knowledge and the new cultural
practices, products, and perspectives of the target language?
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
Candidate’s instruction does
not address comparisons
among the practices,
products, and perspectives
of the culture(s) studied.
OR Materials used in the
clips include significant
linguistic and/or cultural
inaccuracies that will lead
to student
misunderstandings.
Candidate’s instruction
provides limited
opportunities for students
to demonstrate an
understanding of the
relation among the
practices, products, and
perspectives of the
culture(s) studied.
Candidate’s instruction
provides opportunities for
students to demonstrate an
understanding of the
relation among the
practices, products, and
perspectives of the
culture(s) studied and their
own experiences and
knowledge.
Candidate’s instruction
provides purposeful
opportunities for students to
demonstrate an
understanding the relation
among the practices,
products, and perspectives
of the culture(s) studied, and
make explicit connections
to their own experiences and
knowledge.
Level 4 plus:
Candidate’s language
tasks encourage use of the
target language both
within and beyond the
school setting for personal
enjoyment and
enrichment.
o Rubric 9: Analyzing Teaching Effectiveness
How does the candidate use evidence to evaluate and change teaching practice to meet students’ varied learning needs?
Level 1
Candidate suggests changes
unrelated to evidence of
student learning.
Level 2
Candidate proposes changes
that are focused primarily
on improving directions
for language tasks or
task/behavior
management.
Level 3
Candidate proposes changes
that address students’
collective learning needs
related to the central
focus. Candidate makes
superficial connections to
research and/or theory.
Level 4
Candidate proposes changes
that address individual and
collective learning needs
related to the central focus.
Candidate makes
connections to Second
Language Acquisition
research and/or theory.
Level 5
Level 4 plus:
Candidate justifies
changes using principles of
Second Language
Acquisition research
and/or theory.
3. Assessment Rubrics
o Rubric 10: Analysis of Student Communicative Proficiency in the Target Language
How does the candidate analyze evidence of student learning?
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Analysis is superficial or
not supported by either
student work samples or the
summary of student
learning. OR The evaluation
criteria, learning objectives,
and/or analysis are not
aligned with each other.
Analysis focuses on what
students did right OR
wrong using evidence from
the summary or work
samples.
Analysis focuses on what
students did right AND
wrong and is supported
with evidence from the
summary and work
samples. Analysis includes
some differences in whole
class learning.
Analysis uses specific
examples from work
samples to demonstrate
patterns of student
learning consistent with
the summary. Patterns are
described for whole class.
Level 5
Level 4 plus:
Analysis uses specific
evidence from work
samples to demonstrate the
connections between
quantitative and
qualitative patterns of
student learning for
individuals or groups.
o Rubric 11: Providing Feedback to Guide Student Development of Communicative Proficiency in the Target Language
What type of feedback does the candidate provide to focus students?
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Feedback is unrelated to
the learning objectives OR
is inconsistent with the
analysis of the student’s
learning. OR Feedback
contains significant content
inaccuracies and/or
misconceptions about the
target culture(s).
Candidate’s feedback
focuses solely on
identifying errors in
language forms of the
target language. OR
Feedback is inconsistently
provided to focus students.
Feedback is accurate and
focuses primarily on
errors or strengths related
to language forms of the
target language. Feedback
is provided consistently
for the focus students.
Feedback is accurate and
addresses both strengths
AND needs related to
connections between
language functions and
forms of the target
language that promote
the development of
communicative
proficiency. Feedback is
provided consistently for the
Level 5
Level 4 plus:
Candidate describes how
s/he will guide focus
students to use feedback to
evaluate their own
strengths and needs in
developing communicative
proficiency in the target
language.
focus students.
o Rubric 12: Student Use of Feedback
How does the candidate provide opportunities for focus students to use the feedback to guide the development of communicative proficiency in the
target language?
Level 1
Opportunities for applying
feedback are not described.
OR Candidate provides
limited or no feedback to
inform communicative
proficiency.
Level 2
Candidate provides vague
explanations for how focus
students will use feedback
to complete current or
future assignments with
regards to language forms
only.
Level 3
Candidate describes how
focus students will use
feedback to improve
language forms of the
target language.
Level 4
Candidate describes how
s/he will support focus
students to use feedback to
make connections between
language functions and
forms in the target
language to develop
communicative
proficiency.
Level 5
Level 4 plus:
Candidate guides focus
students to generalize
feedback beyond the
current work sample.
o Rubric 13: Using Assessment to Inform Instruction
How does the candidate use the analysis of what students know and are able to do to plan next steps in instruction?
Level 1
Next steps do not follow
from the analysis. OR Next
steps are not relevant to
the standards and learning
objectives assessed. OR
Next steps are not
described in sufficient
detail to understand them.
Level 2
Next steps focus on
repeating instruction,
pacing, or classroom
management issues.
Level 3
Next steps propose general
support that improves
student learning related to
standards and learning
objectives assessed. Next
steps are loosely connected
with research and/or
theory.
Level 4
Next steps provide
targeted support to
individuals or groups to
improve their learning
related to standards and
learning objectives assessed.
Next steps are connected
with research and/or
theory.
Level 5
Next steps provide targeted
support to individuals and
groups to improve their
learning related to standards
and learning objectives
assessed. Next steps are
justified with principles
from Second Language
Acquisition research
and/or theory.